Guinea is one of the world’s most impoverished countries. More than half of its population lives below the poverty line and 17.5 percent struggle for food security. In 2010, Guinea established its first elected, civilian government. The U.S. benefits from foreign aid to Guinea and its strong economic potential. Assistance with Guinea’s health, stability and effective governance is not only deeply needed by Guinea, but also something from which the U.S. ultimately gains.

Strong Economic Potential

Guinea has rich mineral resources, possessing over half of the world’s bauxite (aluminum ore) reserves. The country is also abundant in high-grade iron ore, diamonds, gold and uranium. The mining sector in Guinea is thus a major part of its economy: about 80 percent of Guinea’s foreign exchanges consist of joint-venture bauxite mining and alumina operations. Compagnie des Bauxites de Guinee (CBG), one of the major two routes for exporting Guinea’s bauxite, is a venture jointly owned by the Government of Guinea, a U.S. company called Alcoa, and an Anglo-Australian company Rio Tinto Group. The other major export force is Chinese conglomerates as well as small and midsize business.

Guinea is also blessed with reliable rainfall, abundant sunshine and natural geography that are favorable for renewable energy. The 240MW Kaleta Dam project, constructed and financed by China, began operating in 2015 and has since more than doubled Guinea’s electricity supply. The country’s climate means that it has great potential for commercial agriculture as well.

Investment Friendly

Pressed to improve development, Guinea has been increasingly open to foreign investment. The country’s government has been depleted of financial resources to improve the economy, especially since the Ebola outbreak in 2014-2015. Meanwhile, enterprises in Guinea are in need of more credit than is available.

In 2016, the government launched a new website via the Investment Promotion Agency of Guinea (APIP). The website is meant to promote transparency and help make investments more smooth. The APIP also offers services to foreign investors, including creating and registering businesses, helping with access to benefits of the new investment code, providing information and research studies to interested investors, etc.

The Guinea government does not allow any foreign investor to own media in the country, but besides that, there are no restrictions discriminating against foreign investors. The U.S. also helped a group of foreign investors in Guinea and the government of Guinea form a liaison in 2015.

Barriers to Overcome

While Guinea has extremely investment-friendly laws, the enforcement of those laws needs a stable political environment and a reliable legal system. It is worth noting the country had its first democratically-elected government in 2010 after the country’s independence in 1958, but state institutions are still recovering from two years of rule by the military junta. It’s also faced a number of security and socio-economic vulnerabilities.

Guinea has a disproportionately large military with serious, deep corruption and human rights abuses. It is also feared by law enforcement because of the potential for military revolt. Even though a panel was formed in 2010 to investigate the violent crushing of tens of thousands of peaceful democracy protesters in 2009, two military commanders that the U.N. revealed to be guilty were able to keep their government positions.

Aid for Stability and Development

U.S. foreign aid would directly address barriers to private sector growth as well as improvement of economic life in Guinea in general. For one thing, the U.S. supported the 2010 election process significantly, which has greatly improved the country’s development prospects.

U.S. foreign aid was restricted in 2008 and 2009 due to the rise of the military coup at the time, but restrictions were lifted after the country’s political transformation. Aid from the U.S. helps improve democratic practices, governance, security sector reform, regional peace and stability, etc. These aspects of society are essential for the alleviation of poverty and the establishment of a solid economic infrastructure. A peaceful Guinea is also viewed as significant for restraining conflict in a region already plagued by political tension and armed struggles.

The Consortium for Elections and Political Process Strengthening, supervised by the USAID, supported the 2015 presidential election and 2018 communal elections. It strengthened Guinea’s Independent National Electoral Commission as well as civil society organizations in monitoring the domestic election.

Ultimately, U.S. foreign aid will assist with areas of life in Guinea that in turn presents a great economic potential for the U.S. In other words, the U.S. benefits from foreign aid to Guinea.

After becoming independent from Britain in 1968, the country of Mauritius began a diplomatic relationship with the United States that is still important today. Mauritius, a small island nation in the Indian Ocean, has become one of Africa’s most developed and stable economies, transforming itself from an impoverished country dependent on sugar to a middle-income nation with a diverse economy. Throughout this period of growth and success, the U.S. has been an important partner and has seen great benefits from foreign aid invested in Mauritius. There are three main ways the U.S. benefits from foreign aid to Mauritius.

Maritime Security

One of the biggest priorities for U.S. foreign aid in Mauritius is maritime security: keeping the Indian Ocean safe from piracy and crime. Maritime security allows for safer trade routes and prevents terrorism that could potentially spring up in the area.

Mauritius is one of the only countries in the region with a strong program for maritime protection and has been an important player in U.S. efforts to keep the Indian Ocean secure. U.S. foreign aid in Mauritius provides security officers with training that deals with counterterrorism methods, seamanship, forensics and maritime law enforcement. Without such measures in place, shipping and trading on the high seas, which have benefited the U.S. and Mauritius, could be more challenging.

Trade and Economic Growth

Mauritius is an example of how foreign aid is a form of investment. As the U.S. used foreign aid to develop Mauritius’ economy and improve trade relations, more and more U.S. businesses invested in Mauritius and experienced great results. The U.S. and Mauritius have a bilateral trade and investment agreement and are active trading partners.

As one of Africa’s most developed economies, Mauritius has engaged in many trade agreements and embraced free-market opportunities, some of which were only made possible with U.S. foreign assistance. In 2016, for example, the East Africa Trade and Investment Hub (funded by USAID) and Mauritius’ Board of Investment signed a Memorandum of Understanding to work together in investment promotion activities. The Hub also agreed to help Mauritius take advantage of trading opportunities with the U.S. and incentivize trade in the nation.

Since Mauritius’ has grown to an upper middle-income country and U.S. brands are purchased commonly in this new market, more than 200 companies and products from the U.S. do business in Mauritius. The U.S. exports agricultural and industrial machinery, jewelry and medical instruments to Mauritius and benefits from Mauritius imports such as textiles, precious stones, processed fish and sugar. Bilateral trade between these two countries is currently valued at $337 million.

Diplomacy and Political Stability

An important sector of U.S. foreign assistance is democracy, human rights and governance. Although Mauritius is already a multi-party democracy, foreign aid to Mauritius is still used to secure future democratic peace and stability in Mauritius and throughout Africa. Political stability in Africa is beneficial to the U.S., as unstable African countries that lack strong governments sometimes become havens for terrorism, threatening national security.

One way that foreign aid is used to foster diplomacy with Mauritius is through exchange programs such as the Young African Leaders Initiative (YALI). This program, started by President Obama in 2010, is an important U.S. effort to invest in future African leaders. The YALI program’s goal is to educate and network young African leaders to work for a peaceful future in Africa.

Since 2010, 66 Mauritians participated in the YALI program in the U.S. and then returned to their country to start new businesses, organizations and programs. There are also Mauritians involved in the YALI Regional Leadership Center in South Africa. These centers act as hubs throughout Africa that enhance leadership skills and teach young people to play important roles in their communities. There are about 1,300 members from Mauritius in the YALI Network, which continually provides online resources for young leaders to learn the skills and connections needed to bring change to their communities and stability to their countries.

These examples demonstrate how the U.S. benefits from foreign aid to Mauritius and the importance of this partnership both now and in the future.

The beginning of the 20th century saw the United States begin to take its place at the forefront of the international stage. Fast forward to the middle of the century and the end of WWII and the United States took its place as a world superpower. With this newfound responsibility, the government of the United States began to do more to secure the safety and health of citizens of any nation in its sphere of influence.

Key Aspects of U.S. Foreign Health Assistance

U.S. foreign health assistance began with the Foreign Assistance Act of 1948, better known as the Marshall Plan. The plan’s goal, which it accomplished successfully, was to economically rebuild a war-torn Europe. This included hospitals and universities to train doctors.

The United States Agency for International Development (USAID) was founded in 1961 by President John F. Kennedy as a tool to better aid allied countries and countries teetering on the edge of the West and Communism. The organization also brought all of President Eisenhower’s foreign assistance programs under one agency.

U.S. foreign health assistance in the USAID is under the jurisdiction of The Bureau of Global health. For 55 years, the Bureau for Global Health has worked towards strengthening health systems, combating HIV/AIDS, combating other infectious diseases and preventing child and maternal deaths. Past Presidents have each had a hand in improving the operation and mission of the Bureau for Global Health.

Between 2000 and 2015, Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama both introduced plans to combat malaria and HIV/AIDS. An estimated 6.2 million malaria deaths were prevented around the world.

Global Development Alliances

The USAID Bureau for Global Health is not alone in its fight — Global Health Development Alliances have partnered with USAID since 2001 to provide U.S. foreign health assistance around the world. These partners come from the private sector, and strive to both open new markets and help the local populace in need.

Private medical companies involve themselves in the alliance program — such as “The Utkrisht Impact Bond” led by Merck for Mothers and UBS Optimus — along with other large companies to target infant and maternal mortality in the Rajasthan region of India. Their program currently reaches up to 600,000 people and aims to save 10,000 mothers and children by 2020.

Multilateral and Bilateral Efforts

From 2006 to 2017, the U.S. foreign health assistance programs received a budget increase from $5.4 billion to $10.7 billion. Bilateral efforts comprise 80 percent of the U.S foreign health assistance budget, and one of these efforts is the Family Planning and Reproductive Health Program run by USAID.

The program combats HIV/AIDS, prevents child and maternal deaths and reaches 24 countries on three continents. By 2020, USAID’s goal is to educate 120 million women and girls with family planning information, commodities and services.

Multilateral efforts by the United States government include participation in and funding given to, organizations such as the World Health Organization (WHO) and other multi-government organizations and charities. Unfortunately, the budget request for U.S. health foreign health assistance programs was set at $7.9 billion.

The United States Peace Corps

The United States Peace Corps was founded by President John F. Kennedy in 1960. Its goal then and still today is to help people around the world with the support of the United States government. By helping people in need, Peace Corps Volunteers spread goodwill about the United States and educate people about U.S. citizens and culture. They are probably best known for their English teaching program, but they also specialize in health initiatives.

Such initiatives include participating in programs initiated by Presidents Bush and Obama that reduce people’s exposure to, and number of cases of, malaria and HIV/AIDS. As part of their cooperation with USAID in 2012, the Peace Corps launched the Global Health Service Program to draw the attention of trained health professionals to countries in need.

Members of this program have a one-year service time rather than the usual two years. These volunteers not only help patients in the country, but they also pass on their knowledge and experience to sustainably help these populations in the future.

Center for Disease Control

In 2016, the Center for Disease Control (CDC) was granted $427 million from the United States Congress to participate in combating f HIV/AIDS, malaria and other infectious diseases, as well as promoting immunization and emergency response. The CDC was also granted $10.9 million to participate in recovery efforts in Haiti.

On January 10, 2010, Haiti was hit by a 7 magnitude earthquake. Since then, the CDC has helped the citizens of Haiti in various ways — stopping the spread of infectious diseases through the Haitian health system, educating the Haitian people about the spread and treatment of these diseases and helping the Haitian government reconstruct their health systems. The latter aid is a program first for the CDC.

International Aid Changes Lives

U.S. foreign health assistance has been a major help to many struggling people and countries around the world. Millions of lives have been changed for the better and saved because of the United States’ efforts.

Unfortunately, the budget request for U.S. health foreign health assistance programs was set at $7.9 billion. Although cuts will have to be made in staffing and funding around the world, men and women will not stop trying their best to work with the U.S. government and make a difference.

Within the U.S., there is a misconception of the amount of foreign aid given to developing countries. Some Americans believe the government gives up to 25 percent of the budget, but less than 1 percent gets put towards foreign aid. Niger relies heavily on U.S. aid and from additional U.N. agencies; 45 percent of Niger government’s FY 2002 budget comes from foreign aid. The U.S. benefits from giving foreign aid to Niger because of the positive image and the fiscal and potential foreign policy opportunities.

Niger and the U.S. relations

Niger and the U.S. have maintained a diplomatic relationship since the 1960s. The U.S. is a principal donor to Niger, giving up to $10 million yearly in aid, along with helping to coordinate policy in matters like HIV/AIDS and food security. The U.S. benefits from giving foreign aid to Niger because of Niger’s involvement in the Economic Community of West Africa, a program the U.S. maintains a trade and investment agreement to. Along with this program, there is a bilateral investment agreement the U.S. and Niger share with each other.

Foreign aid in Niger

Being one of the poorest countries in Africa, Niger’s economy relies heavily on agricultural production, which is continuously interrupted by extreme heat and droughts. From June to August in 2010, Niger’s crops were destroyed due to the heat, which caused a famine where almost 350,000 people were facing starvation. International food aid was provided when Niger citizens began suffering from malnutrition and respiratory diseases that sickened many children. In addition to international food aid, U.S. foreign aid aims to improve food security, maintain peacekeeping methods and increase healthcare services. With the Millennium Challenge Corporation compact, which began in January 2018, $437 million will be given to enhance Niger’s agricultural capabilities by increasing access to water, roads and markets. Additionally, Niger is one of six other countries that are involved in the Security Governance Initiative, a program that is labeled as a Counterterrorism Partnership Fund.

With programs and partnerships that the Niger and the U.S. participate in, Niger benefits from foreign aid because it is representative of their yearly budget and allows them to develop more resources to eventually become more self-reliant. In addition to providing aid, the U.S. additionally benefits from foreign aid to Niger. Microsoft founder Bill Gates explains how the U.S. benefits from foreign aid: “The 1 percent we spend on aid for the poorest not only saves millions of lives, it has an enormous impact on developing economies – which means it has an impact on our economy.” This shows that giving aid to third-world countries will positively affect the image of the U.S. and the economy.

Since 2001, the United States has consistently provided foreign aid to Senegal. Washington’s contributions have continuously been above $30 million per year and peaked at $141 million in 2014. As a result, this financial support has had significant impacts on the developing nation.

Combined global aid has improved Senegal’s agricultural efficiency by shifting losses into profits of over $300 million per year, enhanced water access to over 140,000 people and increased access to secondary education by over 75 percent. GDP has increased from four to nearly 15 billion.

How the U.S. Benefits from Foreign Aid to Senegal

Such improvements may seem praise-worthy from a charitable standpoint. Foreign aid, however, is not just a one-way street. In fact, the U.S benefits from foreign aid to Senegal. In one way, foreign aid can be seen as a macro-level investment by a government into an underdeveloped market. Foreign aid is unique in that the risk-level is nearly negligible given that the intent is not to see a personal return on the investment, but rather to accelerate growth to meet basic humanitarian needs.

Despite the moral and seemingly charitable nature of foreign aid, it can pay dividends to the provider in the future. As the receiving state experiences economic growth and stabilizes over time, it becomes more able to establish economic moats and reciprocate the help it received. This is typically though not exclusively seen through an increased ability to trade.

Education

According to the Department of Commerce, current U.S.-Senegal trade relations are limited. While U.S. exports have gone up roughly 90 percent from 2006, U.S. exports to Senegal support only about 900 jobs as of 2015. That number, however, could rise significantly through increased foreign aid in education.

As more individuals become educated and start businesses that leverage increasingly efficient agricultural resources or other products, more jobs and growth could materialize as ‘what goes around comes around’ in giving back to aid nations. Increased trade with Senegal in the future could help the U.S. receive money given as aid back into its economy.

Economic and Political Stability

The U.S. benefits from foreign aid to Senegal by also bolstering economic stability so that it may develop into an emerging market. After the U.S. started providing foreign aid, the IMF in 2015 reported that Senegal’s financial soundness metrics suggested that it was stronger than West Africa as a whole.

The democratic state has also improved politically in the years since foreign aid started. Given the key transfers of peaceful power and the absence of violent conflict, the World Bank has regarded Senegal as one of the most stable states on the continent. Positive ratings have been helpful in slowly pushing Senegal onto the world stage as a prospective future power and perhaps, one day, a true regional hegemon in West Africa.

Investing in Senegal

Today, the nation’s political and economic harmony has drawn talks and the interest of private investors. Senegal’s “Plan Sénégal Emergent” is a new policy framework that seeks to combine social justice with good governance and economic growth to stimulate development. The purpose, as the name suggests, is to establish Senegal as an ‘emerging market’ by 2035.

An emerging market is a state that features characteristics of a developed market, but has not gotten there just yet. Such markets have potential for high growth and profitability – drawing the attention of the world’s financial companies.

While the road ahead seems long and arduous, President Macky Sall remains optimistic that his country can work towards achieving the goal. Foreign aid and a demonstrated domestic interest in maintaining stability show that Senegal wants to be a model for pioneering change in West Africa.

Lucrative Give and Take

The U.S. benefits from foreign aid to Senegal if this happens. Emerging markets are known for high growth opportunities that can be lucrative. Current examples of such markets include states such as China, India and Brazil, which have made big waves in the financial world. Senegal, as a result of development from foreign aid, hopes to be next. Investors could be able to capitalize on growth opportunities in a developing nation, which would materialize benefits to U.S. citizens.

With several nations still struggling with similar issues, there is still work to be done. The Senegal case-study shows that there is a need for foreign aid, and the argument for it is no longer exclusive to just global altruism.

Burkina Faso is a small sub-Saharan African country with a population of 18 million. Often described as one of the world’s poorest countries, the most recent reports estimate that roughly 40 percent of Burkinabè live below the poverty line. While this statistic can be staggering, it is important to take a closer look at the context in which this statistic is produced. In order to achieve this, The Borgen Project offers a list of the top 10 facts about poverty in Burkina Faso.

Top 10 Facts About Poverty in Burkina Faso

Burkina Faso’s Human Development Index Value (HDI) ranks 185 out of 188 countries:The HDI is a measure of a population’s quality of life, access to education and standard of living. According to the United Nations Development Programme, Burkina Faso received a rating of 0.402 in 2015. This value is an improvement from 2005 when Burkina Faso was given a score of 0.325. However, a great deal of progress is still needed in order to attain an acceptable HDI score.

Burkinabè poverty statistics are subject to significant fluctuation:While it is reported that roughly 45 percent of Burkinabè live below the poverty line, a sizeable portion of households teeter just above this line. Therefore, small variations in household incomes significantly affect the actual number of those living in poverty.

Burkina Faso’s economy is expanding: In 2015, the annual GDP growth was 4 percent. In the time span of a year, the GDP growth increased by another 2 percent, increasing Burkina Faso’s rate of growth by 66.1 percent. This expansion is largely the result of urbanization and improved performance in the agricultural and mining sectors.

Burkina Faso’s high fertility rates have limited the positive effects of the expanding economy:Burkina Fasohas one of the highest fertility rates in the world with an average of five children per woman in 2015. Even though the country had experienced a 6 percent annual economic growth rate between 2003 and 2013, increasing family sizes have largely negated the positive impact of this economic growth.

The majority of Burkinabè rely on agriculture:Burkina Faso’s main export is cotton. In recent years, the economy has also benefited from mining gold. However, because the economy is so dependent on the success of a single growing season, natural disasters and unfavorable weather conditions can submerge many households into even deeper poverty. Up to two-thirds of households report being affected annually by these economic blows.

Poverty in Burkina Faso is a hardship endured primarily by members of agrarian society: Geographic location can often predict the economic standing of the Burkinabè. Around 90 percent of those living in poverty reside in rural areas. In the capital city of Ouagadougou, one of the fastest growing cities in sub-Saharan Africa, only 10 percent of the population live in poverty.

Educational enrollment is disproportionately low in rural areas: In 2010, only 45 percent of primary school-age children living in rural areas were enrolled in primary school. Even less, 28 percent of secondary school-age children were enrolled in secondary school. Comparatively, 83 percent of children in urban areas were enrolled in primary school, and 60 percent of were enrolled in secondary school.

The vast majority of Burkinabè poor do not have access to electricity: Less than 5 percent of the poorest households are connected to the national electricity grid. Whereas, over 50 percent of the wealthy have access to these grids. Which shows that only a fraction of the poor communities has access to such a basic service.

In 2018, the U.S. government intends to provide $14.3 million in foreign assistance: It was initially intended that 98 percent of this money go towards improving overall health in Burkina Faso. However, as of June, the U.S. had already donated $11.83 million, but only 24 percent of that money has gone towards health. At least 46 percent has gone towards humanitarian assistance. The remainder has gone towards a combination of education, social services and economic development.

Progress is being made but at a gradual pace:At the moment, 8.145 million are living on less than $1.25 a day. At this rate, it would take 25 years for the average income per person to double. Comparatively, Ethiopia and Rwanda will double their per capita income in as few as 7 to 10 years.

These top 10 facts about poverty in Burkina Faso reveal the progress being made to combat the country’s unacceptably high poverty rates as well as some important areas where the country must focus more on improvement. In order to accelerate the progress, those in a position to do so must deepen their investment in the poor. This investment would include education, access to basic utilities, improved agricultural technology and expansion in employment opportunities. Through a reinvigorated commitment, the staggering poverty rates in Burkina Faso could be minimized.

The success of foreign aid is often shadowed by misconceptions and myths ranging from effectiveness to large overestimates of how much money is spent on aid every year. In an effort to combat some of these myths, foreign aid transparency has become a central issue both globally and domestically. Understanding where funds are being spent is important to donors and citizens as will be explained below. Keep reading for a few facts about foreign aid transparency and where you can find more information on how your nation’s dollars are being used to provide aid to the developing world.

Why Transparency Matters

Transparency includes knowing how much money is spent, where it is spent, who spends it and the overall impact and results. Global foreign aid transparency matters because as nations try to reach the Sustainable Development Goals, this measure will act as the foundation for aid effectiveness and accountability. Aid transparency is important to donor and recipient governments as well as civil society. As citizens who pay taxes, it is reassuring to know exactly where foreign aid funds are being spent and this transparency encourages greater support for foreign aid.

In order to coordinate aid efforts and prevent donors from spending more funds in certain areas and less in others, transparency is key. When donor countries and nonprofits share what they have already spent or are planning to spend, other donors can coordinate their funding off of these numbers and reduce overlap. It is important for donors to research and discuss their funding plans with other nations to achieve greater impact with their limited resources.

Recipients of aid benefit from transparency as well because it is often difficult to know how much aid is given and where it is spent in their own countries. This, in turn, makes it more challenging for governments to decide how much of their own budget to spend on certain problems. Additionally, when aid recipients are not able to show foreign aid money in their budgets or plans for the country, it is much more challenging for citizens and parliaments to hold leaders accountable and corruption can become an issue.

Increasing Accountability with the Aid Transparency Index

One way transparency has improved in recent years is through Publish What You Fund’s Aid Transparency Index. This organization uses research and advocacy to improve transparency mainly through the International Aid Transparency Initiative (IATI). The IATI commits donors to publish all foreign aid data under a common standard that can be compared and accessed easily.

The 2018 Aid Transparency Index was recently launched on June 20. It is the only independent measure of aid transparency among major development agencies and governments making it a valuable tool for foreign aid. This year’s index evaluates 45 countries on a scale from very good to very poor transparency.

This organization uses a relatively complex and detailed methodology for monitoring transparency and scoring agencies. For the most recent Index, 35 indicators were selected that drew upon IATI standards and whether they were upheld. These indicators were then weighted and split into five categories. Organization planning and commitments to transparency are 15 percent of the score, finance and budgets are 25 percent, project attributes, development data and performance are equally split into 20 percent of the score as well. The website also includes a comparison chart on how agencies have improved or declined and extensive reports explaining the Index’s findings.

How to Evaluate a Country’s Transparency

The Index is one very detailed way citizens of major donor countries can easily check their country’s score and whether or not their aid agencies are being transparent. One must simply click on the agency they are interested in to view scores in each category, how they have changed in recent years and recommendations for years to come.

Besides the Index, for individuals in the U.S., there are currently two separate dashboards for USAID and the State Department to share where aid dollars are spent. These can be found at ForeingAssistance.gov and Foreign Aid Explorer. This year, the U.S. was included in the “good” category on the Aid Transparency Index meaning there is still room for improvement.

In 2016, Congress passed the Foreign Aid Transparency and Accountability Act (FATAA) that established requirements for these agencies to publish foreign assistance data. One final provision suggested that USAID and the State Department combine their data into one dashboard by the end of the fiscal year 2018. It is yet to be seen whether this will happen or not but it could be one way of boosting U.S. foreign aid into the very good category for next year’s index.

These are some of the ways that aid transparency has improved in recent years and why it is such a crucial issue for donors, recipients and civil society.

As of 2016, the United States has provided over $38,000 worth of foreign aid to St. Lucia through the United States Agency for International Development (USAID). This small Caribbean island, with a population of 170,015, has a Gross National Income of $11,370 and continues to be at risk for high crime, labor instability and a high level of substance abuse.

Through its many programs and funding ventures via USAID, the U.S. continues to better St. Lucia. However, this foreign aid does not only help the island; the U.S. benefits from foreign aid to St. Lucia as well.

Agriculture and Tourism

Most USAID funding in St. Lucia is allocated to agriculture. By investing in the country’s department of agriculture, the U.S. is aiding as well as fortifying a potential trade relationship. Within the first four months of 2018, almost 10 percent of U.S. imports from St. Lucia were food related — a number that will most likely rise as the country’s agriculture department strengthens.

Another way that the U.S. benefits from foreign aid to St. Lucia is through tourism. St. Lucia’s tourism industry profits greatly from the U.S. as a majority of tourists to the island are American, who tend to buy St. Lucian products. This exchange of goods thus benefits both economies.

The more the U.S. invests in foreign aid to St. Lucia, the more return on investment it will receive. By giving USAID in order to strengthen St. Lucia’s economy, the U.S. is strengthening a trading partner. However, in order to build a secure relationship between the countries, crime and violence must also decrease.

Violence Prevention and Education

One USAID program focuses on targeting violence in a preventative way. In a partnership with St. Lucia’s Department of Education, Innovation, Gender Relations and Sustainable Development, the U.S. has commenced a coding and robotics program into St. Lucia’s secondary education curriculum.

As of June 12, four students and 12 teachers have been trained in the robotics and coding curriculum; more math, physics, computer and traditional classes will be later introduced into St. Lucian secondary schools.

The new initiative creates a new and exciting way for St. Lucian students to become and remain involved in their education as they attend school. In this program, education is not just the knowledge that students gain from learning robotics and coding. The USAID and St. Lucia’s Department of Education also aim to instill a love of learning, teamwork and critical thinking skills into the students.

By introducing the robotics and coding program into secondary schools and impressing a love for learning, as well as teamwork and critical thinking skills, onto St. Lucian students, the two countries hope to decrease the overall violence in St. Lucia.

Sustainable Progress and Growth

People who think critically and are more prone to work together are far less likely to commit violent crimes than their counterparts. By teaching St. Lucian students to be not only better learners, but also better citizens is vitally necessary to the growth of St. Lucia.

With the help of this program, the country’s future adults will be more aptly prepared to participate within St. Lucia as well as the global economy. As the program continues to succeed, St. Lucia will benefit from its future leaders just as the U.S. benefits from foreign aid to St. Lucia.

One of the key challenges facing developing nations is the lack of available infrastructure. Proper infrastructure can help a country build itself up by improving health, transportation, energy, education and a myriad of other vital institutions. Global infrastructure initiatives are a vital form of potential aid that can improve the quality of life for developing nations.

How Energy Infrastructure Helps Emerging Countries

USAID currently works around the world to improve the infrastructure of developing nations. In Afghanistan, the organization helped develop a national electric company that reduced energy loss in the country from 60 percent to 35 percent. Likewise, in the Philippines, USAID was integral in providing energy to 13,000 rural households via solar and hydroelectric plants. Similar projects are taking place in countries such as Jordan, Vietnam and the Ukraine.

Infrastructure is important to a country’s development because without it growth becomes difficult. Without the energy to power development projects of their own, foreign aid ends up catalyzing a nation to empower itself. By providing clean water, countries can save on healthcare costs and invest in other issues. This makes infrastructure one of the most cost-effective ways to invest in the future of a country.

How It Can Be Improved

Unfortunately, there’s a gap between infrastructure development funding needs and its availability. Erecting fundamental structures and corruption are both costly and difficult projects for governments to overcome.

In order to combat these issues, some experts have suggested acquiring funding from the private sector so as to help aid some of USAID’s massive energy project proposals. The theory is that by selling projects to private contractors, governments can cut costs and prevent corruption. However, others such as W. Gyude Moore suggest that actions like these do not resolve the core issues. In either case, it will take a combination of private investors and foreign aid to solve the problem for good.

According to Moore, there are a few key things to keep in mind while thinking about global infrastructure.

Global Infrastructure

Not Every Country is the Same: It seems obvious, and yet current global infrastructure planning could do a better job of differentiating between countries. The G20 Global Infrastructure Hub Pipeline aims to help alleviate this problem by providing investors with comprehensive data on each project. With unique and accurate information, investors will be able to better match their skills and resources with each project.

Private Investment is too Risky in its Current Form: With imperfect information and little standardization, many investors stay away from global infrastructure initiatives unless they can be guaranteed a profit from governments; this issue is then also combated by the G20 Global Infrastructure Initiative. By providing comprehensive information, investors can better prepare for their jobs, thereby reducing costs for themselves and the governments they work with.

Different Types of Infrastructure are More Profitable than Others: While energy infrastructure attracts a large number of investors, more fragile sectors like water and transportation do not. Part of USAID’s infrastructure initiative is to help build these important systems. In Jordan, these efforts supported a water treatment plant that now provides clean water to two million citizens.

While tough challenges do exist for foreign infrastructure in the future, progress can be made via a combination of foreign aid and private sector investment. USAID is currently working to help foreign governments establish infrastructure, and the G20 Global Infrastructure Hub Pipeline helps investors make informed decisions. While there is always more that can be done in regard to global infrastructure, this is a promising start.

Kyrgyzstan, once part of the Soviet bloc, transformed from a one-party communist state into a republican democracy in 1991. Despite its reforms, though, the country is beset by both extreme poverty and government incompetence. With a significant portion of the population destitute, a thriving illegal narcotics market and ethnic tensions between native Kyrgyz and migrant Uzbeks, American investment in its government and people would see substantive U.S. benefits from foreign aid to Kyrgyzstan in terms of security.

State of Kyrgyzstan

Kyrgyzstan’s location in geographically-isolated Central Asia and its lack of natural energy resources, such as oil and gas, prevent it from emulating the industrial rise of neighboring economic goliaths, Russia and China.

The inherent difficulty of encouraging economic growth, coupled with institutional problems and social disorder, has resulted in high poverty rates in Kyrgyzstan. As of 2010, more than 40 percent of Kyrgyzstan residents live below the poverty line. High rates of homelessness and unemployment have turned many to narcotics.

Factors Leading to Revolution

Trafficking drugs across a long, unguarded border with other Central Asian countries linked to Afghanistan is a profitable enterprise, making it lucrative to those who do not have sustainable incomes. The second-largest city in Kyrgyzstan, Osh, is often referred to as the “drug capital” due to the volume of illegal narcotics that passes through the city near Kyrgyzstan’s southern border.

In 2012, authorities seized at least six tons of various substances ranging from cannabis to heroin. The rampant nature of the drug problem, and the government’s inability to resolve it, was one factor that led to revolution.

In June of 2010, more than 350 people were killed in southern Kyrgyzstan during the Second Kyrgyz Revolution over a variety of issues — rape, wealth inequality between rural Kyrgyzstan migrants and urban Uzbeks and gang turf wars over the aforementioned drugs were a few. About 66 percent of Kyrgyzstan’s population is Kyrgyz, with some 14 percent identifying as Uzbeks. The violence between the two ethnic groups in the larger frame of regime change displaced hundreds of thousands of citizens and left the region in turmoil.

Ethnic Tension and Cultural Conflict

Poverty is a breeding ground for radicalism. Its perpetuation is often a vicious cycle, wherein poverty causes political instability, resulting in civil wars and terrorism at home and abroad. These conflicts then wipe out much-needed crops and necessary social institutions like hospitals and schools. In Kyrgyzstan’s case, ethnic tension resulted from lopsided poverty and unaffordable utility prices.

It would be a mistake to assume, however, that the conflict between Uzbeks and Kyrgyz is limited to only Kyrgyzstan or Central Asia. In April 2017, an Uzbek born in Kyrgyzstan killed 14 in St. Petersburg, Russia by rail attack. In October 2017, an Uzbek immigrant killed eight in New York by driving a truck through pedestrians. More than 1,500 Uzbeks have joined the Islamic State, ostracized by many of the countries — especially Kyrgyzstan — they once lived in.

This global violence, spawned in part by the ineptitude of a corrupt and autocratic government in preventing the continuance of radicalization, is not in the interest of either the Kyrgyzstan people or the United States. Just as Kyrgyzstan benefits from foreign aid to Kyrgyzstan, the U.S. benefits from foreign aid to Kyrgyzstan.

In the decades since the Soviet Union’s dissolution, subsequent American administrations have supplied aid intended mostly for the Kyrgyz Republic’s agricultural economy and on-the-ground humanitarian efforts. But it can do more — more for its government and more for its people.

U.S. Benefits From Foreign aid to Kyrgyzstan

Earmarking additional funds could support anti-corruption initiatives to dampen the prevalence of drug transport and abuse among the population. Increased investment in Kyrgyzstan’s energy sector could also diminish dependence on foreign energy and stabilize utility prices. A reduction in poverty and boost in living standards would increase income equality and alleviate some of the tension between Uzbeks and Kyrgyz that currently plagues the country, and by extension of terrorist activity, the world.

As terrorism is such a buzzword in American politics today, preventing it would surely be high on most elected officials’ to-do lists. Helping the Kyrgyz Republic overcome its multidimensional poverty — which can prevent terrorist activity and save lives both in the United States and abroad — would increase national security at a fraction of the cost of not doing so.

To reiterate: the U.S. benefits from foreign aid to Kyrgyzstan. The current administration’s plan to drastically cut its designated aid funds would render most, if not all, of these benefits void.